[GNSO-EPDPP2-SmallTeam] Reminder - google doc input due dateWednesday 24 February

Tue Feb 22 15:54:22 UTC 2022

Good morning team,

I have regrettably not yet finished reading the entire ODA and as such I do not expect to be able to have my full review complete in time to address all the questions by the 24th. I will of course continue working through it, but wanted to let you know now. Are others in the same situation, or am I the straggler?

Thanks, 

-- 
Sarah Wyld, CIPP/E

Policy & Privacy Manager
Pronouns: she/they

swyld at tucows.com 

From: Marika Konings
Sent: February 22, 2022 3:23 AM
To: gnso-epdpp2-smallteam at icann.org
Subject: Re: [GNSO-EPDPP2-SmallTeam] Reminder - google doc input due dateWednesday 24 February

Apologies, that should be THURSDAY 24 February COB. 

From: Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, 22 February 2022 at 09:18
To: "gnso-epdpp2-smallteam at icann.org" <gnso-epdpp2-smallteam at icann.org>
Subject: Reminder - google doc input due date Wednesday 24 February

Reminder, please provide your input on the google doc questions (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ip89qpS6D8bRWyA_rVFeT1ZCVEO3CQwr/edit) by Wednesday 24 February COB at the latest! Thanks Sarah for being the first to complete the assignment.

Best regards,

Caitlin, Berry and Marika

From: GNSO-EPDPP2-SmallTeam <gnso-epdpp2-smallteam-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen at icann.org>
Date: Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 17:36
To: "gnso-epdpp2-smallteam at icann.org" <gnso-epdpp2-smallteam at icann.org>
Subject: [GNSO-EPDPP2-SmallTeam] Notes from GNSO Council SSAD ODP Small Team meetings - 9 Feb and 16 Feb 2022

Dear SSAD ODP Small Team Members,

Below, please find the notes from the first two meetings of the SSAD ODP Council Small Team.

Thank you.

Best regards,

Marika, Berry, and Caitlin
--

SSAD ODP Council Small Team – Meeting #1 – Wednesday, 9 February 2022

1. Welcome & introductions
2. Review of small team assignment (see here) 
The small team is expected to consider the concerns outlined in the ICANN Board letter and with these concerns in mind analyze the SSAD ODA and provide the Council with its feedback on: 
• Whether the ODA has correctly interpreted the intent of the SSAD recommendations in the proposed implementation; 
• Whether the ODA has overlooked any key aspects of the SSAD recommendations that should be factored in by the ICANN Board when it considers the recommendations; 
• Its view on the concerns identified by the ICANN Board and potential options that could be considered, either in the form of changes to the proposed implementation or the policy recommendations themselves, to address these concerns (note, these are expected to be high level suggestions at this stage); 
• Any other aspects that help inform the Council’s deliberations and consultation with the ICANN Board.
Procedural options:
a. ICANN Board adopts the recommendations – No role for the GNSO Council 
b. The ICANN Board determines that the adoption of the recommendation is not in the best interest of the ICANN community or ICANN – GNSO Council requested to affirm or modify its recommendations in the form of a “Supplemental Recommendation” 
c. GNSO Council decides to make amendments or modification to the policy recommendations – Under section 16 of the GNSO PDP Manual the GNSO Council can make amendments or modifications to the recommendations it approved. 
- Question about the assignment:
- What are the expectations of Council and Council leadership are for this small team? 
- There is a double mission: the Board has written to the Council and sent questions; in principle, we should provide answers. At the same time, the Board has asked some leading questions – seem to be guiding us on a path into dividing the SSAD into piecemeal options. Think this group should step back and analyze the ODA to see if there are additional questions.
- Not hearing an assignment to go back to Council with next steps
- Small team will look at how to mitigate concerns either through looking at changing the proposed implementation or changing the policy recommendations. If there is an opinion, should the Council take back the recommendations, or does the Board agree with the changes? If so, it will go back to the Council for potential addressing.
- Do not anticipate this group becoming an EPDP and starting over but rather coming up with high-level ideas that could help
- The 3 first questions in the Google Doc are intended to inform the first 2 questions – the intent is to break these questions down into small pieces. If there is not a common or shared view on some of these questions, the small team may just provide the different views back on some of these questions

3. Review of questions for input (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ip89qpS6D8bRWyA_rVFeT1ZCVEO3CQwr/edit [docs.google.com]) 
- Question 3 seems to suggest that there are important benefits from SSAD and should be added to the benefits included in the ODA
- Is this the right place, or if not, where can we have the discussion of code of conduct? If we could expedite the process of a code of conduct, that would be beneficial.
- The board letter didn’t just raise questions; it also outlined a number of concerns. The objective here is to see if those concerns are shared – the question here – there may not be a perceived benefit – are there benefits that need to be highlighted that would outweigh the potential concerns or costs? 
- The usage noted in the ODA may be optimistic, should we dispute the usage of the system
- Q6 seems to be very difficult and may be likely to draw the group back into camps
- Do not want to rewrite the Board questions – one assignment is to consider how to respond to the board. This document doesn’t map to those questions – it seems to be having an identity crisis.
- The board did not ask questions, but just stated concerns 
- The council is looking at the small team to see if the small team agrees with the board’s concerns
4. Discuss proposed timeline: 
• Complete team’s input on questions by 24 February
• Share any clarifying / follow up questions with ICANN org by 25 February
• Next meeting of small team to review input on questions – Wednesday 2 March
• Provide GNSO Council with initial update on small team findings by Friday 4 March
• GNSO Council – ICANN Board meeting at ICANN73 (Tuesday 8 March)
• GNSO Council meeting to consider small team findings & conversation with the ICANN Board. GNSO Council to indicate expectations in relation to potential further work by small team.
5. AOB

SSAD ODP Council Small Team – Meeting #2 – Wednesday, 16 February 2022

1. Welcome
- Question: need to be on the same page regarding the group’s task – thought the team was expected to consider the concerns outlined in the Board’s letter, and with those concerns in mind, review the ODA and provide the Council with feedback
- Mission of this small team is to answer to the ICANN board letter 
- The questions in the letter were for the previous 27 Jan meeting - the Google doc questions focus on the concerns that were flagged in the letter.
- The Council needs to understand, from its perspective, on what the implications of the ODA are – needs to decide how to engage with the Board in the context of the consultation – is there a way to mitigate these concerns or other concerns the Council has identified?
- By the end of this meeting, we will use up significant time. If there are answers to the questions, let’s get into the google doc and answer them – would the GNSO modify the recs before the Board considers? That is an interesting question to consider 
- 
2. Review input received on the proposed questions (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ip89qpS6D8bRWyA_rVFeT1ZCVEO3CQwr/edit [docs.google.com]) 
- First email from Marc centers around Q1-3 – they center around cost and benefit. Is there enough info or the right info in the ODA for the ICANN Board to make a proper informed decision? Q3 asks about benefits not highlighted in the ODA – there doesn’t seem to be any benefits highlighted in the ODA. 
- In speaking with Goran in a leaders call and asked if the public interest test considers costs and benefits, and Goran emphatically said no – if there is a benefit, costs are not considered
- This is a question that the Board has before it, and there has been no determination on it 
- Need to be careful not to become a subgroup EPDP revision test – should focus on answering the Board’s direct questions
3. Proposed timeline: 
a. Complete team’s input on questions by 24 February
b. Share any clarifying / follow up questions with ICANN org by 25 February
c. Next meeting of small team to review input on questions #1-6 – Wednesday 2 March
d. Provide GNSO Council with initial update on small team findings by Friday 4 March
e. GNSO Council – ICANN Board meeting at ICANN73 (Tuesday 8 March)
f. GNSO Council meeting to consider small team findings & conversation with the ICANN Board. GNSO Council to indicate expectations in relation to potential further work by small team.
4. AOB:
a. Small team input on global demand for SSAD survey question (seehttps://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdpp2-smallteam/2022-February/000009.html)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdpp2-smallteam/attachments/20220222/549d8cdc/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 929B6BAA7EBD4F1DA96682823D6FDB9F.png
Type: image/png
Size: 15054 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdpp2-smallteam/attachments/20220222/549d8cdc/929B6BAA7EBD4F1DA96682823D6FDB9F.png>